[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


 

>USSR collapses
>Gorbachev bends over for porky
>burgers back yeltsin
>yeltsin shells parliament
>Ex-soviet children used for Redacted

Narrative A:
<this is because Stalin purged too many communists and the party became revisionist

Narrative B:
<this is because Stalin didn't purge enough Anti Communists and the party became revisionist.

Narrative C:
<this is because Stalin both purged too many communists AND didn't purge enough anti-communists

Narrative D:
<This is because the Soviet union was a besieged geopolitical entity from its very birth to its demise, dealing with WW1, a civil war, 14 invaders who tried to reverse the revolution, an interwar period of hostility and sanctions, a western backed fascist genocide against the soviet people in WW2, a never ending cold war arms race and series of proxy wars that sucked money out of development and into the military, a boondoggle in afghanistan, a soviet-sino split, and then finally the victory of revisionism.

Why do so many on here argue over narratives A, B, and C while ignoring narrative D entirely?

>the soviet union was bullied out of communism

skill issue. Cuba and DPRK are chugging along just fine.

Because Stalin was a self agrandozing asshole who made himself appear very important

>>2627136
The USSR did not "collapse", it was overturned in an illegitimate coup which went against the will of the soviet people expressed in a referendum that even western observers admitted was "fair".

>>2627136
>Why do so many on here argue over narratives A, B, and C while ignoring narrative D entirely?
Because narrative D is insufficient to explain why a country that was stagnating economically suddenly collapsed politically despite no prior warnings. The dissolution of the USSR wasn't really caused by endemic issues to their particular political model, but because of a sudden change in governance which resulted in nationalist tensions.
Besides, answer D is a shitty explanation. Yes, the USSR did loose a lot of money on foreign entanglement, but it wasn't the major cause of their economic stagnation. It's one small part of a medium part of the influence behind Gorby's choices.


also, it's narrative A. The entire Brezhnevian generation never questionned the economic model despite needing obvious adjustment. Once Gorbachev took power, he got radicalized by the lack of political accountability and transparency, which he thought explained the economic downturn.

>>2627160
correct and it seems based on the rest of OP's post they agree with that.

Because too many communists here think of historical materialism as a vulgar, linear hard determinism.
They do not understand stochastic non-linear systems with highly coupled variables. That type of determinism is what Marx and Lenin tried to expound upon via dialectics. As long as humanities students will hide in their philosophico-literary cave and shun science, that is the inevitable outcome.
Conversely, this is why Paul Cockshott gets so many things right in a clear, straightforward manner: his formal education is in the hard sciences.

>>2627170
>collapsed despite no prior warnings
Oh there were plenty of warnings. The first glaring one was when Khrushchev declared the USSR would achieve (full) socialism by 1980. Molotov clearly understood the stupidity of that claim.
Read 'Molotov Remembers'. Nothing deep, just a bunch of remarks by Molotov over many years well after he fell out of favour and his gealth was declining, but still very instructive and enlightening.

>>2627136
Read Bordiga.

>>2627179
I didn't know chagos poster was a dickblast fan; i kneel

>>2627160
OP here, you're right. I didn't mean to imply that. I was just being flippant.

People that believe on narrative D are brezhnevite apologists, after stalin died, the revisionist cliques of kosygin-brezhnev-khruschev runned the USSR to the ground and look what we are here now!!!
Hoxha and Mao were ultimately right

>>2627189
A series of negations which do not carve an affirmation in their unravelling is the worst kind of pseudo-intellectualism. It is simply pedantic moaning for the sake of moaning.

Gramsci put it best:
In [Bordiga’s] long article one thing is truly noteworthy: the elegant skepticism with which he avoids taking a clear position on points which he nevertheless affirms to dissent from; there is the continual oscillation between thesis and antithesis, without for all that indicating an “original” thesis of his own.

Comrade Bordiga limits himself to upholding a cautious position on all the questions raised by the Left. He doesn’t say: the International poses and resolves such and such a question in this way, but the Left will instead pose and resolve it this other way. He instead says: the way the International poses and resolves problems doesn’t convince me; I fear it falls into opportunism, there are insufficient guarantees against this, etc. His position, then, is one of permanent suspicion and doubt. In this way the position of the “Left” is purely negative; they express reservations without specifying them in a concrete form, and above all without indicating in concrete form their point of view, their solutions. They end by spreading doubt and distrust, without constructing anything.

Narrative F
>the USSR fell because the Brezhnev doctrine was abandoned

>>2627217
The soviet union was weak because he made the gensec boots so big and impossible to fill, this is why the secret speech had to be written and so on. A solid system doesn't rely on the quality of a pseudo king and its sycophants, personality cult is backward weakness espiecally for a supposed dotp.

>>2627223
you skipped E. Let me refer you to this theory so that you may learn more.

File: 1767558296933-0.png (80.22 KB, 668x833, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1767558296933-1.png (271.52 KB, 720x511, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2627224
>personality cult is backward weakness espiecally for a supposed dotp.
Stalin unironically agrees with you:

Or narrative Z is that the post-Stalin old and withered leadership did not nuke the imperialists to oblivion and were only interested in "detente". They were too weak to do what must be done and only good for doing a good parade and nothing more

>>2627136
>Why do so many on here argue over narratives A, B, and C while ignoring narrative D entirely?
to own the "MLoids" (by sweeping for western imperialism, but owning the MLoids is more important for this group)

>>2627221
Gramsci was so fond of Sorel that he fell asleep whenever Bordiga steelmanned Lenin's strategy for their Italian conditions. Knowing what we know from Gramsci's corpus of works he must have fallen asleep to Marx and Engels writing on the materialist dialectic as well, so it's not that shocking.

Especially today - what is so obscure about the tactics of the ICP? They don't liquidate their program and party hard enough to petty-bourgeois adventurism or opportunism, I take it? Electoral road and the accommodation of liberalism is what's been missing for communist parties in the imperialist countries, right? Do you lose a lot of sleep every election cycle my friend, seeing your party coffers return nothing substantial? How much of your parties time and resources could instead go to strengthening and supporting workers in workplace conflicts with a communist organization and program that, like our enemy, transcends borders?

Oh sorry the Maoist nationalist micro-party is just about to launch the PPW from the Norwegian suburb…
Trotskyist sect #9543575's newspaper just officially merged autonomism with Naztrot and… will tail the Labour Party in New Zealand again, but well this time?
Russian/Chinese shell company party with three Indian business owners opened in three immigrant communities in England? Good that it's called "The Workers Party", has a red-white-and-blue flag, is "anti-GLOBOHOMO" and houses a clickfarm where the party meeting should be.

>>2627370
you didn't say why he was wrong. you did however evolve into a bunch of random assumptions and babble towards the end, especially in the final paragraph.

>>2627351
you do realize that a full scale nuclear exchange between the NATO and Warsaw pact countries would have been an incredibly severe setback for humanity as a whole, right? The productive forces destroyed in such an exchange would have been enormous, putting Earth into conditions neither capitalist, nor socialist, nor even feudal, but neo-slavery, because most of the remaining surviving population would be injured, cancer stricken, and start enslaving one another into agriculture to survive.

>>2627370
Your program exists insulated from the real movement. But you honour this flaw by invoking the invariant dharma of the historic sangh.

>>2627423
>Your program exists insulated
Only in the your delusional, ignorant and careless mind. You haven't analyzed what you speak of. You operate on the level of online disinformation / memes, not historical materialist rigor.
<Oh sorry the Maoist nationalist micro-party is just about to launch the PPW from the Norwegian suburb…
<Trotskyist sect #9543575's newspaper just officially merged autonomism with Naztrot and… will tail the Labour Party in New Zealand again, but well this time?
<Russian/Chinese shell company party with three Indian business owners opened in three immigrant communities in England? Good that it's called "The Workers Party", has a red-white-and-blue flag, is "anti-GLOBOHOMO" and houses a clickfarm where the party meeting should be.
So which of these is your immortal tendency netting you the indisputable results in the bourgeois state you find yourself today buddy? You're real careful not to share that so far. Every academic "Marxist's" / rag journalist's favorite idealist modernizer, Gramsci, isn't much to go by!

>>2627448
You accuse me of operating on the level of internet m memes but you are the one listing a bunch of internet tendencies with descriptions of their stereotypes.

>>2627455
That is what one is forced to pass through like butter both in real political spaces and online as noise while one self-educates. I take it you don't go outside? Cute name btw, spent a lot of time on that one I'm sure.

Still you're running.
You aren't organized, are you?

>>2627370
why is he wrong
>Oh sorry the Maoist nationalist micro-party is just about to launch the PPW from the Norwegian suburb…
>Trotskyist sect #9543575's newspaper just officially merged autonomism with Naztrot and… will tail the Labour Party in New Zealand again, but well this time?
>Russian/Chinese shell company party with three Indian business owners opened in three immigrant communities in England? Good that it's called "The Workers Party", has a red-white-and-blue flag, is "anti-GLOBOHOMO" and houses a clickfarm where the party meeting should be.
wtf does this shit even mean

>>2627487
he wants to generalize and insult le western left,but is too irony poisoned to commit and resort to implying things instead

>>2627487
>>2627498
Your immortal Marxist-Leninist PCd'I ended up going Eurocommunist and dissolving itself by the way. Is that what you meant to reply with?

Because that would disprove stalin's liberalism in one country theory

>>2627479
Wtf are you talking about

>>2627516
The TL;DR is Chagos is a coward intellectually

>>2627523
You just made up shit and have been schizoing all over the place
I dont even get your point

>>2627527
You're also seething, you forgot to mention that

>The evil west made us betray communism ):
Maybe you should have nuked them then dumbass slavic uyghurs. No westoids, no counter revolutonaries, and worldwide utopia

>>2627136
Why do so many leftists have a tendency to leave out Putin the Westophile who's Yeltsin's hand-picked successor? Even the main Russian communist party cares more about attacking stupid symbols of Yeltsin than Putin.

>>2627602
because he has no relevance to the collapse of the USSR?

>>2627607
Then why mention post-collapse happenings at all?

>>2627602
what are you even talking about everyone calls him cucktin on here now because of his constant pro west trump cucking

>>2627617
I didn't say "all leftists." I said "so many leftists."

>>2627614
1993 can be seen as the final nail in the coffin for any resistance against the new liberal order, everything after that is history

>>2627170

Snall correction: The Soviet economy never went into a downturn (negative gdp growth) from 28 to 88 except during the war years. What happened its growth rate slowed over time, and especially after the first 5 years or so of the kosygin reform.

>>2627628
you forget the 1996 fraud election

>>2627498
>he wants to generalize and insult le western left,but is too irony poisoned to commit and resort to implying things instead
but the chagos guy isn't even western

File: 1767586254622.png (6.46 MB, 2000x2000, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2627602
because cucktin the westophile is a target for regime change operations. if anything cucktin is proof that ring-kissing bootlicking bourgeoisie is not enough for the west. they always want more more more more more more more more more. give them an inch they'll take a mile. give them a mile they'll take the world's circumference. their thirst for blood is so great they'll even execute their own dogs to replace them with younger newer dogs.

>>2627498
>>2627911
>Erm, omg, this guy, like, doesn't even knoo who this namefag is??
<Ya. That's crazy.. (Wish he would reply and not run like a bitch tho..)

>>2627398
also humanity might not recover. We already used up a lot of the ease to access resources. WE might just get stuck at one point of development

>>2627136
can i ask where that documentary is from, looks interesting

>>2627136
You're correct OP and unfortunately there's still some self-proclaimed leftists who can't abandon the Great Man spook. Stalin was a Great Man therefore it was his decisions that made or broke the USSR. If only he had been a Greater Man and had the foresight to ensure that his Great Man legacy had lived on for eternity.

File: 1767592821553.png (2.82 MB, 1680x1050, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2628049
>can't abandon the Great Man spook

Ludwig: Marxism denies that the individual plays an outstanding role in history. Do you not see a contradiction between the materialist conception of history and the fact that, after all, you admit the outstanding role played by historical personages?

Stalin: No, there is no contradiction here. Marxism does not at all deny the role played by outstanding individuals or that history is made by people. In Marx's The Poverty of Philosophy and in other works of his you will find it stated that it is people who make history. But, of course, people do not make history according to the promptings of their imagination pr as some fancy strikes them. Every new generation encounters definite conditions already existing, ready-made when that generation was born. And great people are worth anything at all only to the extent that they are able correctly to understand these conditions, to understand how to change them. If they fail to understand these conditions and want to alter them according to the promptings of their imagination, they will land themselves in the situation of Don Quixote. Thus it is precisely Marx's view that people must not be counterposed to conditions. It is people who make history, but they do so only to the extent that they correctly understand the conditions that they have found ready-made, and only to the extent that they understand how to change those conditions. That, at least, is how we Russian Bolsheviks understand Marx. And we have been studying Marx for a good many years.

Ludwig: "Some thirty years ago, when I was at the university, many German professors who considered themselves adherents of the materialist conception of history taught us that Marxism denies the role of heroes, the role of heroic personalities in history.

Stalin: They were vulgarizers of Marxism. Marxism has never denied the role of heroes. On the contrary, it admits that they play a considerable role, hut with the reservations I have just made.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1931/dec/13.htm

>>2628073
>leftists overemphasize Stalin's role in the USSR's ultimate fate because of Great Man Theory
>um AKSTUALLY here's Stalin calling himself a Great Man
???
Do you even know what the thread is about little bro or did you just have that copypaste ready to go?

>>2628076
>um AKSTUALLY here's Stalin calling himself a Great Man
Read the source for context

Ludwig: No, that is really so, and for that very reason I shall put questions that may seem strange to you. Today, here in the Kremlin, I saw some relies of Peter the Great and the first question I should like to ask you is this: Do you think a parallel can be drawn between yourself and Peter the Great? Do you consider yourself a continuer of the work of Peter the Great?

Stalin: In no way whatever. Historical parallels are always risky. There is no sense in this one.

Ludwig: But after all, Peter the Great did a great deal to develop his country, to bring western culture to Russia.

Stalin: Yes, of course, Peter the Great did much to elevate the landlord class and develop the nascent merchant class. He did very much indeed to create and consolidate the national state of the landlords and merchants. It must he said also that the elevation of the landlord class, the assistance to the nascent merchant Class and the consolidation of the national state of these classes took place at the cost of the peasant serfs, who were bled white.

As for myself, I am just a pupil of Lenin's, and the aim of my life is to be a worthy pupil of his. The task to which I have devoted my life is the elevation of a different class-the working class. That task is not the consolidation of some "national" state, but of a socialist state, and that means an international state; and everything that strengthens that state helps to strengthen the entire international working class. If every step I take in my endeavor to elevate the working class and strengthen the socialist state of this class were not directed towards strengthening and improving the position of the working class, I should consider my life purposeless.

So you see your parallel does not fit.

As regards Lenin and Peter the Great, the latter was hut a drop in the sea, whereas Lenin was a whole ocean.

>>2628016
It's Shock Doctrine (2009)

>>2627999
>Wish he would reply and not run like a bitch tho
he's permabanned so he has to get a new IP every now and then to keep posting.

>>2628083
>he's permabanned
For what, never elaborating? Putting too many symbols in the name field?

USSR collapsed because of the epistemological limit of Communism, hence why we must turn to civilizational Communism (socialism with Chinese characteristic!) to ground the fourth political theory. But even from a trad Marxist perspective the USSR was an abomination. Lenin opted to commit into establishing communism in Russia because he genuinely believed that the whole world would transition to communism soon, so a communist Russia can circumvent capitalism through direct aid from a Communist West. This did not happen ofc, the German revolution failed, and Lenin was stuck in a country with a peasant economy and looming famine. The USSR was doomed from the start and the next 70 years were just a slow rolling collapse unfolding

>>2628091
Go back to /pol/

>>2628092
What i'm saying is not controversial for any actual Academic Marxists, continental or analytical. We know that Lenin gambled on West Europe going communist not only from his personal correspondence but because that was what Marx literally said about Russia! ; that it already had the communal social conditions for communism (i agreed with him on this) and thus in case of communism emerging (in the most developed part of the world first!) Russia can skip having to undergo capitalism through aid from a communist west. This is why the failure of the German revolution was so shocking to him

>>2627136
> a besieged geopolitical entity
<encompassed third of asia
<enslaved half of europe
<influenced rest of asia, southern america and numerous startes in africa

>>2628105
<enslaved half of europe
They didn't do that. Eastern europe was getting more out of the CMEA bloc, than the USSR. And they were each making independent decisions. Like trading with the west, and trying to get loans.

>>2628114
independent decision making ended in soviet invasions as long as ussr was able to intervene, cmea was established because european states were forces to drop out of marshal plan after falling into soviet sphere

>>2628083
For the year 2026, I have decided to reply only to good faith arguments, not debate-addict trolls who make up arguments, defeat their imaginary arguments and then declare themselves the great winners.

>>2628183
>independent decision making ended in soviet invasions as long as ussr was able to intervene
The cases of Hungary and Czechoslovakia was necessary. They were engaging in counterrevolution from the top.
>Cmea was established because european states were forces to drop out of marshal plan after falling into soviet sphere
That may be the case, but it failed to meet the objectives of preventing the eastern bloc of engaging with the west, and unified economic integration of the entire eastern bloc.

>>2627136
Narrative E:
The Soviet Union never died, and is still alive, practicing Leninism, the Perestroika was a deception, Russians won the cold war


>>2628105
<enslaved half of europe
Butthurt belt nonsense

File: 1767602567694-0.png (68.68 KB, 1353x282, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1767602567694-2.jpg (182.17 KB, 759x1000, YAK EVIL.jpg)

File: 1767602567694-3.png (208.53 KB, 1102x704, YAKOVLEV 6.png)

File: 1767602567694-4.jpg (286.19 KB, 2259x3777, Yakovlev big mack.jpg)

>>2628222
>the Perestroika was a deception
After the 20th Congress, in the ultra-narrow circle of our closest friends and like-minded people, we often discussed the problems of democratization of the country and society. They chose a method as simple as a sledgehammer to propagate the "ideas" of the late Lenin. It was necessary to clearly, clearly and distinctly isolate the phenomenon of Bolshevism, separating it from the Marxism of the last century. That is why they tirelessly talked about the "genius" of late Lenin, about the need to return to Lenin's "plan for the construction of socialism" through cooperation, through state capitalism, and so on. A group of real, not imaginary, reformers developed (orally, of course) the following plan: to strike with the authority of Lenin at Stalin, at Stalinism. And then, if successful, - to strike with Plekhanov and Social Democracy - at Lenin, and then – with liberalism and "moral socialism" - at revolutionarism in general. A new round of exposure of the "cult of personality of Stalin" began. But not with an emotional outcry, as Khrushchev did, but with a clear implication: the criminal is not only Stalin, but the system itself is criminal. – Alexander Yakovlev [Black book of communism Russian edition]

It's time to say that Marxism was a utopia and a mistake from the very beginning. I can't begin to understand why Marx, a very intelligent person for sure, failed to see that his theory missed the most important thing, freedom of choice. – Yakovlev, 1988 [From Fate of Marxism's introduction]

[The political conclusions of Marxism are unacceptable for an emerging civilization seeking a path to reconciliation and mitigation of the original conflicts and contradictions of existence.

no longer have the right to ignore the consequences of dogmatic stubbornness, endless incantations of fidelity to the theoretical legacy of Marxism, just as we cannot forget the sacrifices made on its altar.

Perestroika must break the vicious circle in which the new word finds itself.] – From Yakovlev's note to Gorbachev https://shop.alexanderyakovlev.org/fond/issues-doc/1023389



'''[“You have to act. The biggest obstacle to perestroika and your entire politics is the
Politburo, then the Plenum. There is no need to convene it so often. If you continue to delay
taking power, everything will fall apart. In the next couple of weeks, maybe instead of the
Supreme Soviet that is scheduled for the middle of February, you should convene a Congress of
People’s Deputies and establish presidential power. Let the Congress elect you president.” (By
the way, M.S. agreed with this in principle even in Novo-Ogarevo and the idea was even
included in the second draft of the Platform, which was at the PB on January 22nd. But there
wasn’t enough resolution to do it immediately, without delaying it till May or the fall).
“Thus,” A.N. [Yakovlev] continued, “to concentrate the real, plenipotentiary State power
in your hands, removing the Politburo and even the talkative Supreme Soviet from the levers of
power.”'''
'''“In the next few days before the Plenum, which is now scheduled for February 5-6,”
Yakovlev continued, “appear on TV and make a direct appeal to the people, accepting full
responsibility for the truly emergency program according the formula: land to the peasants,
factories to the workers, real independence for republics, not a Union state, but a union of states,
multi-party system and the practical rejection of CPSU’s monopoly, large loans from the West,
military reform—get rid of the generals and replace them with Colonels, recall troops from
Eastern Europe, liquidate the Ministries, sharply reduce the apparatus—all forms of it, etc. Plus,
special emphasis (in the TV speech) on a series of emergency economic measures (in principle—
private enterprise; apparently, Slyunkov, who is in opposition to Ryzhkov-Maslyukov, has a
preparatory paper on this)… Furthermore: start the process of replacing Ryzhkov. You cannot
make any reforms with a Premier who thinks on the level of a factory director, with State
Planning that was raised on the methods of the military-industrial complex.”
“And who instead?” M.S. asked Yakovlev.'''
'''“There are plenty of people, you just have to take them more boldly, that’s what a
revolution is for!”'''
'''Yakovlev did not let me know what M.S. agreed with and what he didn’t. M.S. followed
his usual course, telling Yakovlev to “go to Volynskoe, lock the doors there and don’t tell
anyone a word. Take a couple trusted people with you who know how to write, and prepare a
speech for TV, we’ll go from there.”
I responded to Yakovlev: in a word, we are talking about a coup d’Etat here…
“Yes,” A.N. agreed. “And we cannot delay.”]''' – The Diary of Anatoly Chernyaev, 1990

Perestroika was a deception, but not your narrative E, which I only see from right wing red baiting crazies, who can't conceptualize and understand the content of a political ideology.

File: 1767602683758.png (586.67 KB, 641x525, which bordiga.png)

>>2627189
which bordiga?

Because D is a liberal take, denying the internal contradictions of the USSR.

>>2628359
ok provide the correct take

Structual
>USSR inherits all the shitty Tsarist institutions and shoves a red coat of paint on it
>Nomenklatura system incentivizes a form of "meritocracy" that you see mocked a lot in Chinese dramas. How you rise up in the Soviet system is through nepotism, corrupt under the table deals and handshakes and fucking over rivals instead of cooperation. This leads to famously Soviet institutions and firms refusing to work with eachother in good faith and constantly sabotaging eachother.
>This corruption spread to every day life, you paid off retail workers to hold the best stuff for you, you brought "presents" to the hospital or doctors so you would get seen faster, you gave "gifts" to firemen so you could be sure they would turn up and put out your house. (Watch any 60s-70s Soviet dramas like Office Romance or Beware The Car and you can see this stuff is a major theme)
>This corruption would seriously start sabotaging the USSR around the 1960s, with the USSR basically yeeting it's own technological advantage of 10-20 years in some areas into the trash because of corruption and inter-department infighting and rivalries. Famously you saw this with Soviet cybernetics and the Soviet internet, which were yeeted in the 60s because the Ministry of Finance saw it as a threat to the Market reforms (1965 Kosygin-Liberman reforms) they were pushing, N1 rocket build was fucked due to inter-firm sabotage and infighting working on the rocket.
>Because the entire system ran informally on corruption, nobody wanted to stop it since it was quite literally how most workers in white collar/retail etc jobs actually made their money. Want to speak to the manager? Give the waiter 20 rubles or some foreign cigarettes, Want to have your ordered new coat actually turn up instead of being held in a box out back, give the retail worker 100 rubles etc.
Politically:
>Shitloads of the CPSU were just organized crime types who worked their way up the system through massive levels of corruption, Yeltsin famously who basically yeeted entire highway funds into his and his mates pockets. The Great Purges hit too many Communists who believed in the system and didn't shut their mouths because they were true believers, while those just playing the political game knew which way the winds were blowing and sided with whatever was politically expedient for them to rise up.
>Post-Stalin this left a USSR with very little ideologically committed Communists and a lot of political power hungry revisionists now who largely controlled the levers of power.
>The only single decent leader post-Stalin was Andropov, and he kicked the bucket due to type 1 diabetes just as his anti-corruption reforms started to see decent results, which of course were reversed immediately by Gorby who nuked the economy, then Yeltsin who put the final bullet in the head.
>Political Paternalism. Average Soviet citizen saw Politicans and Government as just "daddy" and did whatever they said, they had no idea how to truly be politically or ideologically active, so when clear Revisionism took place, they just went along with it. Compare this with China with Mass Line that keeps the general population politically engaged and has constant back and foward input on Governance. Mass Line is also why Chinese in studies are actually more politically engaged and engage in more protest and industrial actions than Westerners. Famously Soviet Paternalism would be used by Yakovlev to smear and destroy the Soviet system ideologically, if daddy CPSU says Communism is bad, then it must be.
There are a lot of vectors as to why the USSR was dismantled, but for me these are the big ones.

>>2628379
>Because the entire system ran informally on corruption, nobody wanted to stop it
That's not true. There were a few people in leadership that were against corruption, and were ascetic, but I agree with the structural argument overall.

>>2627170
>Besides, answer D is a shitty explanation. Yes, the USSR did loose a lot of money on foreign entanglement
Why do you completely ignore the wars that were fought on its own territory and essentially wrecked the country two times? The american civil war is laughable in comparison.

>>2628278
crazy how this butthurt belt overlaps 1 to 1 with the part of europe ussr enslaved

>>2628753
How did the USSR enslave Eastern Europe? Do you know what 'enslavement' means?

>>2628756
you're talking to a p*le


Unique IPs: 35

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]